Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T

Department of Radiology, Alysis Zorggroep, Rijnstate Hospital, Wagnerlaan 55, 6815 AD Arnhem, The Netherlands.
European Radiology (Impact Factor: 4.34). 09/2009; 20(3). DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1573-5
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT The purpose of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of 3.0-T breast MRI interpretation using manual and fully automated kinetic analyses.
Manual MRI interpretation was done on an Advantage Workstation. Retrospectively, all examinations were processed with a computer-aided detection (CAD) system. CAD data sets were interpreted by two experienced breast radiologists and two residents. For each lesion automated analysis of enhancement kinetics was evaluated at 50% and 100% thresholds. Forty-nine malignant and 22 benign lesions were evaluated.
Using threshold enhancement alone, the sensitivity and specificity of CAD were 97.9% and 86.4%, respectively, for the 50% threshold, and 97.9% and 90%, respectively, for the 100% threshold. Manual interpretation by two breast radiologists showed a sensitivity of 84.6% and a specificity of 68.8%. For the same two radiologists the mean sensitivity and specificity for CAD-based interpretation was 90.4% (not significant) and 81.3% (significant at p < 0.05), respectively. With one-way ANOVA no significant differences were found between the two breast radiologists and the two residents together, or between any two readers separately.
CAD-based analysis improved the specificity compared with manual analysis of enhancement. Automated analysis at 50% and 100% thresholds showed a high sensitivity and specificity for readers with varying levels of experience.


Available from: G. Stapper, Jun 15, 2015
1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate usefulness of MR CAD in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for prediction of tumor's pathologic complete response. Objective: 148 breast cancer patients (mean age: 47.3, range: 29-72 years) who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy included our study. They had taken MRI before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and pathologic result reviewed as gold standard. Methods: Computer-generated kinetic features for each lesion were recorded, and features analyzed included "threshold enhancement" at 50% and 100% minimum thresholds; degree of initial peak enhancement; and enhancement profiles composed of lesion percentages of washout, plateau, and persistent enhancement. Final pathologic size and character of tumor was correlated with post-chemotherapy mammography, ultrasonography and MR CAD findings. Kruskal-Wallis test and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to analysis. Results: We divided 148 patients as complete pathologic response group and non-complete pathologic response group. Complete pathologic response was defined as no histopathologic evidence of any residual invasive cancer cells in the breast or axillary lymph nodes. 39 patients showed complete pathologic response, 109 patients showed non-complete pathologic response. Between enhancement profiles of MR CAD, plateau proportion of tumor was significantly correlated with tumor's pathologic response (mean proportion of plateau on complete pathologic response group was 27%, p-value=0.007). Conclusion: When plateau proportion of tumor is high on MR CAD, we can predict non-complete pathologic response of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Advances in knowledge: MR CAD can be a useful tool for the assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and prediction of pathologic result.
    British Journal of Radiology 08/2014; 87(1043):20140142. DOI:10.1259/bjr.20140142 · 1.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background We aimed to investigate the efficacy of computer-aided detection (CAD) for MRI in the assessment of tumor extent, lymph node status, and multifocality in invasive breast cancers in comparison with other breast imaging modalities. Methods Two radiologists measured the maximum tumor size, as well as, analyzed lymph node status and multifocality in 86 patients with invasive breast cancers using mammography, ultrasound, CT, MRI with and without CAD, and 18-fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET). The assessed data were compared with pathology. Results For tumor extent, there were no significant differences between pathological size and measured size using mammography, ultrasound, CT, or MRI with and without CAD (P > 0.05). For evaluation of lymph node status, ultrasound had the best kappa coefficients (0.522) for agreement between imaging and pathology, and diagnostic performance with 92.1% specificity and 90.0% positive predictive value. For multifocality, MRI with CAD had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC = 0.888). Conclusions CAD for MRI is feasible to assess tumor extent and multifocality in invasive breast cancer patients. However, CAD is not effective in evaluation of nodal status.
    Cancer Imaging 02/2015; 15(1). DOI:10.1186/s40644-015-0036-2 · 1.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the additional value of computer-aided detection (CAD) in breast MRI by assessing radiologists' accuracy in discriminating benign from malignant breast lesions. A literature search was performed with inclusion of relevant studies using a commercially available CAD system with automatic colour mapping. Two independent researchers assessed the quality of the studies. The accuracy of the radiologists' performance with and without CAD was presented as pooled sensitivity and specificity. Of 587 articles, 10 met the inclusion criteria, all of good methodological quality. Experienced radiologists reached comparable pooled sensitivity and specificity before and after using CAD (sensitivity: without CAD: 89%; 95% CI: 78-94%, with CAD: 89%; 95%CI: 81-94%) (specificity: without CAD: 86%; 95% CI: 79-91%, with CAD: 82%; 95% CI: 76-87%). For residents the pooled sensitivity increased from 72% (95% CI: 62-81%) without CAD to 89% (95% CI: 80-94%) with CAD, however, not significantly. Concerning specificity, the results were similar (without CAD: 79%; 95% CI: 69-86%, with CAD: 78%; 95% CI: 69-84%). CAD in breast MRI has little influence on the sensitivity and specificity of experienced radiologists and therefore their interpretation remains essential. However, residents or inexperienced radiologists seem to benefit from CAD concerning breast MRI evaluation.
    European Radiology 03/2011; 21(8):1600-8. DOI:10.1007/s00330-011-2091-9 · 4.34 Impact Factor